KESAVAMMAL (EXPIRED) Vs. C LOGANATHAN & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision has been filed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chengalpattu, in C.M.P. Nos. 22 and 23/2006 in O.P. No. 86/2004 on its file allowing the petition for impleading the petitioner therein as an opposite party in the main complaint.

(2.) THE order by the District Forum appears to be based on the endorsement made by the proposed party to the effect that he had no objection for being impleaded as a party. In our view, such an order cannot be sustained. It is for the complainant to choose its adversaries. In the present case, the complainants did not choose to make the petitioner before the District Forum as a party to the proceedings. The principle of dominus litus should apply. If the complainant does not choose to make a person a party, it is not for either the existing opposite party or any other third party to apply for and get somebody else/or himself impleaded as a party. May be the proposed party could be a proper and necessary party but then it is up to the complainant to make him a party or not. It is not for the opposite parties to dictate terms. Needless to point out that any order made in the main application would bind only the parties to the proceedings and not anybody else who has not been made a party. In that view of the matter, the order of the District Forum cannot be sustained.

(3.) IN fine, the revision petition is allowed; the petition filed before the District Forum for impleadment is dismissed. The complaint shall proceed with the parties already on record. No cost.